Junior Lawyers Vakalatnama: Can They Appear in Court Without One?

In the legal profession, junior lawyers vakalatnama requirements often raise questions about their courtroom authority. Junior lawyers frequently assist their seniors in legal proceedings, but can they appear in court without a vakalatnama based solely on oral instructions? This remains a grey area in legal practice.

Understanding the Junior Lawyers Vakalatnama Provision

A vakalatnama is a formal document that authorizes an advocate to appear, plead, and act on behalf of a client in a legal matter. The Bombay High Court Manual provides an exception: If a lawyer who has already filed a vakalatnama engages another lawyer, the latter does not require a separate vakalatnama. This provision offers flexibility, avoiding the inconvenience of obtaining fresh client authorizations whenever a new team member appears in court.

Traditionally, courts have allowed junior lawyers to make submissions on behalf of their seniors without demanding a vakalatnama, trusting the face value of the senior lawyer. However, this practice has been challenged recently, with judges taking a more rigid stance.

The Growing Strictness Around Junior Lawyers Vakalatnama Rules

While earlier, it was common for judges to accept submissions from junior lawyers based on their senior’s oral instructions, recent cases suggest a shift towards a stricter approach. The primary concern is whether the junior has formal authorization to act on behalf of the client. Instances of unauthorized individuals making misleading submissions have contributed to this growing apprehension.

Moreover, there is a client representation aspect to consider. When a client hires a senior lawyer, is there an implicit understanding that the senior can delegate court appearances to a junior? There is no explicit rule that requires client consent for such delegation, leaving a grey area that remains unaddressed.

Risks and Misuse of Junior Lawyers Appearing Without a Vakalatnama

The practice of junior lawyers appearing without a vakalatnama poses certain risks:

1. Lack of Accountability: If a junior lawyer makes an incorrect submission, the client may suffer. Should the responsibility fall on the junior, the senior, or the court for allowing the appearance?
2. Strategic Blame-Shifting: Some senior lawyers might use juniors as a shield—if a submission is accepted, all is well; if rejected, the senior can later appear and disown the junior’s arguments.
3. Unauthorized Submissions: There have been instances where individuals, not legally authorized, have misled the court. The absence of clear rules creates room for exploitation.

Need for Clearer Junior Lawyers Vakalatnama Guidelines

The ongoing confusion calls for explicit regulations addressing:

• Whether a junior appearing without a vakalatnama needs express client consent.
• The extent of submissions a junior lawyer can make without senior supervision.
• Measures to prevent unauthorized individuals from making submissions.
• A balance between courtroom efficiency and protecting clients’ interests.

Conclusion

While allowing junior lawyers to appear without a vakalatnama ensures flexibility, the risks associated with misuse cannot be ignored. Courts and bar councils should consider clearer policies to prevent legal ambiguities while maintaining professional efficiency. Until then, junior lawyers and their seniors must tread cautiously to avoid procedural disputes that could impact their cases and client interests.

Written By – Ankur R. Jahagirdar